A question that comes up time and again in the theatre world is how critics and practitioners should relate to one another. The rise of theatre blogging has done a great deal to blur the lines between these two camps, due to the fact that more directors, actors and designers are taking to their keyboards to air their opinions, and that the internet allows artists and reviewers to talk more directly than ever before.

Yet, as we can see from this week's blogs, this situation can give rise to a number of quite knotty ethical questions. Rob Weinert-Kendt has been looking back at the argument that erupted a couple of weeks ago when David Cote, the theatre editor of Time Out New York, engaged in a thorough trashing of blogger and playwright George Hunka. Weinert-Kendt is interested in how a relationship in the virtual world can affect matters in the real one; he mentions that the New York Times once commissioned him to review one of Hunka's plays, but eventually spiked it "because George and I were on each other's blogrolls". Weinert-Kendt goes on to wonder what sort of coverage Hunka and his theatre company can now expect from Time Out. Given Cote's attitude, would it be naive to assume Hunka might be treated fairly?

This sense of responsibility incurred by the critic towards the artist is being discussed in a different way by Kris Vire on the Storefront Rebellion blog. He responds to a recent suggestion that in a time of recession, "critics should champion [rather than criticise] theatre in their communities to help save art". This, Vire argues, is nonsense: "It does no one any good to encourage bad theatre … The absolute worst thing we can do as critics is to be soft on a show we didn't enjoy because people worked so hard on it."

Suzy Evans, in a guest post on the Playgoer's blog, agrees. She argues that "just because we're in a recession doesn't mean critics should promote and congratulate poor theatre – that would simply exacerbate the problem". If critics praise bad work, not only will readers lose their faith in the judgment of the writers, artists won't be challenged or motivated to do better.

Many theatre practitioners might actually agree with this. The actor Travis Bedard, who blogs at Cambiare Productions, recently received very mixed reviews for a show he was in. "It is in my best interest to have as rigorous a review of my work as I can get," he wrote. "I may discard some of it as not useful to my future work or as an outlier in reference to this work. But if it's all going to simply be treacley appreciation for 'how hard I tried' I will never be one whit better tomorrow than I am today." In the long run, honesty is far more valuable than flattery.